contingency arrangements: gcse, as, a level, project and aea
TRANSCRIPT
1
CONSULTATION
Contingency arrangements: GCSE,
AS, A level, Project and AEA
Consultation proposals for contingency
arrangements for the award of GCSE, AS, A level,
Project and AEA qualifications in 2022
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
2
Contents
Proposals at a glance .................................................................................................... 3
Audience ........................................................................................................................ 3
Consultation arrangements .......................................................................................... 4
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 5
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Exams in 2022 .................................................................................................................................. 5
Consultation details ...................................................................................................... 8
TAGs as the contingency for 2022............................................................................................... 8
The evidence used to assess students’ performance ............................................................... 9
Draft guidance on assessing students to generate evidence to be used to determine
TAGs if needed ............................................................................................................................... 10
A national approach ...................................................................................................................... 14
Contingency arrangements for private candidates ................................................................. 15
Quality Assurance .......................................................................................................................... 16
Appeals ............................................................................................................................................ 18
Equalities impact assessment ...................................................................................... 21
Regulatory impact assessment................................................................................... 25
Likely impact of implementing proposed contingency arrangements ............................... 26
Likely impact if contingency arrangements not needed ....................................................... 30
Innovation and growth................................................................................................................. 30
Annex A: Consultation responses and your data ...................................................... 32
Annex B – Ofqual’s role, objectives and duties ......................................................... 37
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
3
Proposals at a glance
The government is firmly committed to GCSE, AS and A level exams going ahead in
England in academic year 2021 to 2022, with adaptations to take account of the
impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on the education of the students
due to sit those exams. This document, which has been prepared jointly by the
Department for Education and Ofqual, sets out the plans that are in place to support
the taking of exams even if further disruption to education occurs, and invites your
views on proposed contingency arrangements for awarding Teacher Assessed
Grades (TAGs), in the unlikely event that exams are not able to go ahead as
planned. The proposals cover GCSEs, AS, A levels, Project qualifications, and the
Advanced Extension Award (AEA) in mathematics.
Audience
This consultation is likely to be of interest to:
• students, including private candidates, who are expecting to take GCSE,
AS, A level, Project, and AEA qualifications in summer 2022 and their
parents and carers
• teachers of these qualifications
• school Trusts, Trust executives, trustees and governors
• school and college leaders and heads of other types of exam centre
• stakeholder representative organisations, including unions
• exams officers
• exam boards
• those who use qualifications to make selection decisions: further and
higher education institutions and employers
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
4
Consultation arrangements
Duration
This consultation will be open on Thursday 30 September and close on Wednesday
13 October at 11:45 pm.
Respond
You can respond to this consultation online.
For information on how we will use and manage your data, please see Annex A:
Consultation responses and your data.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
5
Introduction
This is a joint consultation by the Department for Education (DfE) and Ofqual on
contingency arrangements for the award of GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
qualifications in England should exams not be able to go ahead due to the impact of
the pandemic.
The DfE is responsible for its policy for qualifications (including as to whether the
government considers that exams can safely or fairly go ahead as planned) and the
subject content that is taught and assessed. Ofqual is responsible for the
assessment arrangements, and is therefore responsible for setting regulations to
implement contingency arrangements should they be required. Given we both have
responsibilities related to contingency arrangements, we have decided it is helpful for
us to consult jointly on this issue. These responsibilities will be reflected in the
decisions that are taken following the consultation.
Background
In 2020 and 2021 it was, regrettably, necessary to cancel national exams. In 2020
exams were cancelled in light of school and college closures for the majority of
students and uncertainty over whether exams could take place safely. In 2021 the
government considered that it would not be fair for exams to go ahead as planned
once schools and colleges closed to the majority of students again in January 2021.
In place of exams, students were awarded qualifications based on centre
assessment grades in 2020 and TAGs in 2021. Whilst there were some important
differences between these 2 approaches, both involved students being awarded
grades submitted by their school or college.
Exams in 2022
The circumstances of the last 2 years aside, other things being equal, exams and
other formal assessments are the best and fairest means of assessment and the
government’s firm intention is that students will take national exams in summer 2022,
set and marked by the exam boards. To help ensure that exams and other formal
assessments can go ahead and are fair, we have put in place a range of mitigations.
These include:
• adaptations to non-exam assessment to take account of potential public
health restrictions and free up teaching time (announced on 16 June)
• adaptations to exams, including a choice of topic or content in some
GCSE subjects, exam aids in GCSE maths, physics and combined
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
6
science, and advance information about the focus of the content of exams
in the majority of subjects at GCSE and for all A and AS level subjects
apart from art and design (announced on 30 September)
• asking the exam boards, when setting the timetable for 2022 exams, to
ensure that there is at least a 10 day gap between exams in the same
subject to reduce the risk of students missing all exams in a subject
• students who unavoidably miss one or more exams in a subject being able
to achieve a grade through the special consideration process, so long as
they have completed the assessment for at least one component of the
qualification
• providing guidance for exam centres on how to ensure that exams can be
conducted safely, for example through appropriate spacing of desks
• general advice on contingency planning from Ofqual, which covers a range
of potential scenarios which could affect the delivery of exams
We will continue to monitor the effects of the pandemic on schools and colleges and,
if required, introduce further measures as a last resort if there is a significant
increase in disruption, and/or a tightening of public health restrictions. In particular:
• if there is further widespread and significant disruption to teaching and
learning, we have indicated that we will bring forward the publication of
advance information about the focus of the content of exams, to enable
schools and colleges to focus their remaining teaching time
• if there are new public health restrictions put in place which may affect
exams, the DfE will review its guidance and consider whether to put in
place an Exams Support Service, as operated for the autumn series
exams in 2020 and 2021, to support centres with access to venues and
invigilators
We are confident that these changes will enable exams to go ahead fairly in summer
2022. As COVID-19 becomes a virus that we learn to live with and steps such as the
vaccination of young people take effect, it is imperative to reduce the disruption to
children and young people’s education, including by returning to the normal
arrangements for awarding qualifications, particularly given that the direct clinical
risks to children are extremely low, and every adult has been offered a first vaccine
and the opportunity for 2 doses by mid-September.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
7
Further contingencies
Nevertheless, the last 18 months have shown that the path of the pandemic is
unpredictable. Whilst we hope and expect that all exams will be able to take place, it
is right that we have contingency plans in place.
As in 2020 and 2021 our priority in circumstances where exams could not go ahead,
either because of fairness or safety, would be to ensure that students received
grades in as fair a way as possible, to enable them to progress to the next stage of
their lives.
If, and only if, the above measures are not sufficient to allow exams to proceed, we
propose to maintain stability by awarding grades through a TAGs process similar to
that used in 2021. Whilst we recognise that any contingency plan has its drawbacks,
we believe that TAGs are the fairest way to assess students if exams are not able to
go ahead. Drawing from the experience of 2021 and in light of the additional time
that centres have to prepare for such a contingency plan, we are consulting on some
proposed changes to improve the process for students, teachers and centres. We
are planning that any decision to cancel exams would lead to the use of TAGs for
GCSE, AS, A level, project and AEA qualifications, regardless of the precise
weighting that they have of exam and non-exam assessment.
Confirmation now that if exams are cancelled, grades will be determined through
teacher assessment will give teachers and students some certainty. This
consultation has been informed by feedback on, and by a wider review of, the
arrangements in place last year, and invites views on how that process can be
further improved as a contingency in 2022. Responses to this consultation will allow
us to quickly determine our expectations of how centres prepare for TAGs as a
contingency and minimise uncertainty should exams be cancelled.
This consultation seeks views on the approach that would be used to determine
TAGs if exams cannot take place, to the level of detail that centres need in advance
to prepare for such a scenario, for example by collecting and storing evidence. It also
seeks views on where improvements should be made to other elements of the
process that do not need to be confirmed in advance of knowing the circumstances
of any decisions to cancel exams. We will use the responses to this consultation to
inform the arrangements for these steps of the TAGs process should exams be
cancelled.
This might include issuing additional guidance for centres to help them determine
TAGs from the evidence they have collected and would include establishing an
emergency regulatory framework. Ofqual anticipates that, informed by this
consultation, it would be able to promptly to set up such an emergency regulatory
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
8
framework in consultation with the exam boards. As this year, exam boards might
also issue guidance for centres under such a framework.
Consultation details
Against the background set out above, we are now seeking views on how the TAG
process could be improved and, in particular, how the experience for students could
be made more consistent and the burden on students, teachers, schools and
colleges reduced. We invite views on:
• the type, volume and timing of the production of the evidence used to
inform TAGs
• the support given by the exam boards to teachers determining TAGs
• quality assurance within schools and colleges (internal quality assurance)
and undertaken by the exam boards (external quality assurance)
The proposals in this document apply to GCSE, AS and A level, Project and AEA
grades awarded in England in summer 2022 only.
TAGs as the contingency for 2022
For GCSE, AS and A level, Project and AEA qualifications awarded in summer 2021,
TAGs were used by exam boards to determine results for students. We consulted on
the arrangements for 2021, the proposals for which received high levels of support
from the 100,000 plus respondents.
Schools and colleges were asked to decide grades based on a range of evidence of
students’ performance. They were given considerable freedom to decide on the
evidence to be used, which generally included some or all of: records of student
attainment, classwork, mock examinations, and the range of non exam assessments
(NEA) that students were already completing for these qualifications.
The arrangements for TAGs gave students a chance to show what they could do
after a year of unprecedented disruption to their education. The flexibility built into
the arrangements allowed schools and colleges to decide when to assess their
students, enabling them to take account of any local disruption, and to assess their
students only on the parts of the subject content their students had been taught. We
know that while the arrangements for 2021 were successful in allowing students to
move on, they had significant workload implications for teachers. We have sought to
reduce this impact in our proposals.
We have considered whether there is a better way by which grades could be issued
to students in 2022 should exams again have to be cancelled. We believe that an
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
9
approach based on TAGs is the best possible approach, given the firm expectation
that exams will be able to take place in 2022, the need to prioritise teaching and
learning given the disruption to students’ education caused by the pandemic, and the
uncertainty about why and when any decision to cancel exams might need to be
taken. The approach used in 2021 allowed students to receive grades and move on
with their lives. It inevitably placed burdens on teachers, but the introduction of a
different system for 2022 (should that be necessary, and assuming an alternative
acceptable approach could be found) would mean that teachers had to familiarise
themselves with a different approach which would likely be more burdensome still.
However, there are lessons we can learn from 2021, and in identifying TAGs as the
best option for contingency arrangements in 2022, we have the opportunity to
consider how to make improvements. We know, for example, that when we set out
the evidence requirements for 2021 we needed to make them as broad as possible
in order to allow schools and colleges the flexibility to respond to their individual
circumstances at short notice. One consequence of this, which we have heard from
teachers and students, was that in many schools and colleges, students were
assessed multiple times in a short timeframe, reducing the already limited teaching
time available. Some students and teachers raised concerns that different
approaches to gathering evidence were being taken in different schools and
colleges, which they considered to be unfair.
In response to these concerns, we propose that if TAGs have to be used again in
2022, there should be tighter guidance on the evidence on which TAGs would be
based. This would have several advantages including:
• helping teachers to decide what evidence should be used to inform a TAG,
if that was needed
• reducing teacher workload
• reducing student anxiety and the risk of over-assessment
• increasing consistency between centres in the way students are assessed
The evidence used to assess students’
performance
We are consulting on guidance that we propose should inform the way teachers
collect evidence to support the awarding of TAGs, should they be needed, in 2022.
This guidance aims to address concerns raised about the variable amounts and
types of evidence on which 2021 TAGs were based. It aims to enable teachers to
collect evidence at points in the year that work best for them and their students,
whilst minimising the burden of collecting such evidence. It should also reassure
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
10
students that not every piece of their work would be used to determine their TAG.
Assessing students in line with the proposed guidance would also support students
preparing for the exams we expect them to take next summer. The proposed
guidance would be common across subjects and exam boards.
This guidance is based on a fundamental principle that, wherever possible and
particularly where disruption is limited, teachers should teach students the full course
of study for their qualification.
Draft guidance on assessing students to generate
evidence to be used to determine TAGs if needed
We are seeking views on the following draft guidance, set out in paragraphs a-m
below, which we propose teachers and centres should use as they decide how to
prepare for the possibility that exams are cancelled and they need to determine
TAGs for their students.
a. Where a specification includes NEA, centres should support students,
wherever possible, to complete that assessment in line with arrangements
announced by Ofqual for 2022 and the timescales set by exam boards.
b. In addition to completing any NEA, centres should plan assessment
opportunities for TAGs in advance, to a timetable that secures some evidence
early in the academic year (for example, before Christmas) to protect against
further disruption. Those assessments should provide students with an
opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding across the full
range of content they have been taught. Teachers will want to guard against
the risk of over-assessment and think about opportunities to schedule specific
assessment opportunities which would provide evidence from a significant
proportion of the specification. A sensible pattern could be to plan to assess
students once in each of the second half of the autumn term, the spring term,
and the first half of the summer term.
c. When carrying out assessments that could be used towards TAGs,
centres should assess students in ways that are as useful as possible for
students expecting to take exams next summer by creating assessment
opportunities that replicate, in full or part, exam board papers (past papers
could be used, in full or part, where appropriate). Such assessments will also
help to inform teaching and learning.
d. The conditions in which the assessments are undertaken should be
similar to those students will experience when they take their exams in the
summer (for example unseen papers, closed book, timed and with
supervision). This will both help ensure that the work is authentic and prepare
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
11
students for exams in the summer. Those controls may be provided within a
classroom rather than exam hall setting.
e. Each assessment should only cover subject content that students have
been taught at the time of the assessment and not include questions on topics
they are yet to study. The range of planned assessments should mean that
students are prepared to be assessed on the full range of content they will
have been taught.
f. Centres may wish to aim for a total assessment time that does not
significantly exceed the total exam time for the specification.
g. Students should be told before they take the assessment that their
performance in the assessment would be used to inform their TAG if exams
were cancelled to ensure they have time to prepare. They should be told the
aspects of the content the assessment will cover, but not the specific
questions.
h. Students in the same centre cohort should be assessed using the
same approach where possible and all the assessments taken should be
used to determine the TAG (not just those in which students performed best).
The centre will make the final judgement about what is to be used and will
need to document the rationale for any instances where consistent evidence
is not used for a whole class or cohort.
i. The same reasonable adjustments that will be made for disabled
students taking exams in the summer should where possible be applied to the
assessments – and records made of the adjustments and the reasons for
them. The reason why any reasonable adjustment was not made must be
recorded.
j. Where disruption to education does not allow for assessments or NEA
to be completed as set out above, centres should arrange to collect evidence
that provides equivalent confidence of authenticity and of equivalent breadth
where possible. If this does not prove possible, however, centres may also
need to collect evidence that is not based on such assessments for either a
whole cohort or for individual students and/or mark partially completed NEA.
k. Where disruption necessitates such approaches, centres should record
those decisions and the disruption experienced for inclusion in a centre policy
should awarding be based on the TAGs that resulted from that evidence.
l. Teachers should mark the work and carry out any internal
standardisation of the marking, in line with exam board guidance where
appropriate. Students should be provided with feedback, which could include
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
12
marks or comments, but teachers must not determine a TAG unless exams
are cancelled nor tell their students what their TAG might be.
m. The original student work must be retained by the teacher – students
could be given copies if this would help support their learning.
The guidance proposed in this consultation is focused on those steps schools,
colleges and teachers should take in the coming months to make sure students have
evidence in place on which TAGs could be based if needed. Further guidance on
using the evidence collected to determine TAGs, would only be published if a
decision was taken to cancel exams.
We consider that the guidance we are proposing above could be applied to every
subject although there might be some subjects or qualifications where the range of
options for evidence is more limited. For art and design qualifications and Project
qualifications, which are not assessed by exams, only the guidance that relates to
NEA would apply and TAGs would be determined by an assessment of the fully or
partially completed portfolio or project (the requirement for art and design students to
also complete an exam board-set task for summer 2022 has already been set aside
in the outcome to the consultation on Proposed changes to the assessment of
GCSEs, AS and A levels in 2022). We propose that, as in 2021, we should not
require exam boards to complete moderation of NEA if exams are cancelled.
We propose that if exams are cancelled, Ofqual will set conditions as we did in 2021
requiring exam boards to take reasonable steps (including through the use of a head
of centre declaration) to make sure that evidence, however collected, is appropriately
used by a centre to determine its TAGs. It is not necessary to set out proposals for
the regulatory framework for the contingency arrangements at this stage.
Centres could, however, set out in their centre policies (if exams were cancelled)
why they had taken a different approach to collecting evidence. Different approaches
might be needed, for example, for centres determining TAGs for private candidates
and provision might also need to be made for students joining a centre late in the
academic year.
In 2021, exam boards provided material to schools and colleges to support them in
gathering evidence. The exam boards also provided a range of support materials for
use by teachers determining grades, such as exemplar student work, materials on
making objective decisions free from bias and grade descriptors.
This exam board provided material, alongside further past papers, will support
centres to produce work to inform grades in 2022. While we do not believe further
material is necessary, we are, however, interested in views on any additional support
the exam boards could provide to teachers should TAGs be needed next year.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
13
Question 1
How helpful do you think this guidance will be for teachers who will be
making decisions on how to collect evidence to support TAGs as a
contingency if exams are cancelled in 2022?
Question 2
Are there any parts of the guidance which you think could be improved?
Please be specific about which element of the guidance (a – m) you are
referring to.
Question 3
To what extent do you agree or disagree that the guidance set out above
would reduce pressure on students, compared to the arrangements for
TAGs in 2021?
Question 4
To what extent do you agree or disagree that the guidance set out above
would reduce teacher workload, compared to the arrangements for
TAGs in 2021?
Question 5
Do you have any comments on the support exams boards should
provide to teachers determining TAGs should they be needed in 2022?
Please be specific about any additional support you think should be
provided.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
14
Question 6
To what extent do you agree or disagree that if exams are cancelled
exam boards should not be required to continue moderation of NEA?
Question 7
Do you have any other comments about the evidence which should be
used to assess students’ performance?
A national approach
In 2021, the decision to cancel exams was applied at a national level across
England. We propose that a national approach should again be taken to exam
cancellation (should that be necessary for 2022) and to contingency arrangements.
We recognise that regional differences in the impact of the pandemic could
potentially make it easier or harder for exams to take place in certain parts of the
country than others. But we believe that it would not be acceptable or command
public confidence to have different approaches to awarding grades for the same
qualifications running in different parts of the country. It would not be possible to
align the standards of grades awarded to some students who had taken exams with
the TAGs determined by teachers, without the use of a standardisation approach of
the type that proved unacceptable in 2020.
Question 8
To what extent do you agree or disagree that if it proves necessary to
cancel exams and implement TAGs in some parts of the country, exams
should be cancelled for all students and the TAGs approach should be
implemented nationally?
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
15
Question 9
Do you have any other comments about the proposal for a national
approach?
Contingency arrangements for private candidates
Private candidates do not study within a school, college or other exam centre, such
as a private tutorial college. Private candidates are typically home educated or
students who are re-taking a qualification having left the school or college with which
they originally studied. They may be studying with a distance learning provider, tutor,
parent, or without of any of these things.
In normal years, when exams take place, such candidates register with an exam
centre – a school, college or other type of exam centre – which arranges for the
candidate to take their exams alongside their students. As we expect exams to take
place in 2022, private candidates should register with a centre to sit exams in 2022
in the usual way. The JCQ has a database of centres that are willing to support
private candidates.
In the event of exams being cancelled, private candidates wanting to access the
TAG process would need to make arrangements with a centre to complete the
required assessments, for the specifications they have studied, in supervised
conditions. We propose recommending to private candidates that they discuss these
arrangements with centres and take them into account when choosing the centre(s)
with which they wish to register to take their exams. We propose that we work with
centres and private candidates to support students to find opportunities to generate
the evidence that would be required for a TAG. While it might be possible for some
private candidates to undertake assessments entirely in line with the proposed
guidance outlined above, and some might wish to do so, others would only want to
undertake such assessments if exams were cancelled and TAGs needed to be
generated. We propose that the same guidance as set out above would apply to how
private candidates were assessed, except for the guidance that students’
assessments would be spread out over the year. We propose that private candidates
could undertake their assessments in a more concentrated period.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
16
Question 10
Do you have any comments on how arrangements from 2021 could be
improved in order to better provide access to TAGs for private
candidates?
Quality Assurance
In 2021 the exam boards required each school and college to undertake its own
quality assurance of the TAGs it proposed to submit. Each school and college
developed its own policy for determining and quality assuring TAGs; most developed
their policies using a template provided by the exam boards.
The exam boards contacted all schools and colleges to check they understood what
was required from them. They also checked each policy submitted to them by
schools and colleges and they followed up with any schools or colleges whose
policies gave rise to concerns.
We propose that schools and colleges should only develop centre policies for the
awarding of TAGs if exams are cancelled, to avoid them diverting resources from
other priorities. Schools and colleges are likely to find that their 2021 policy provides
a good starting point for their 2022 policy, but they will need to update their policies
to reflect any guidance we publish following this consultation in respect of the
collection of evidence for 2022 should exams be cancelled. The planning that
schools and colleges will do about how they will gather evidence to support
contingency arrangements will form a framework that would support the
development of a centre policy should one be needed. Centre policies would also
need to reflect the detailed arrangements for determining, quality assuring and
submitting grades once those arrangements are decided following any
announcement to cancel exams.
Following any such announcement, we propose that the exam boards should be
proactive in engaging with schools and colleges to ensure they understand the 2022
TAG requirements, in the same way as they did in 2021. We propose that, having
had regard to advice provided by the exam boards, schools and colleges should
submit their policies to the exam boards for scrutiny.
In 2021 every school and college submitted evidence of student work as part of the
QA process and this evidence was required for all students for the appeals
arrangements. Centres should be prepared to submit work again in 2022 (perhaps
for more students than was the case in 2021) should grades be determined on the
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
17
basis of TAGs and evidence of work would again be needed for appeals. For this
reason, we propose that centres should keep original records of the work that might
be used to contribute to TAGs and that centres should be ready to explain and/or
review their TAGs when required to do so by an exam board.
In 2021 the Secretary of State set out in a Direction to Ofqual that it was government
policy to trust teachers’ judgements and that TAGs should, therefore, only be
changed by the exam boards by exception. Following the public rejection of the
approach to standardise grades in 2020 in order to maintain standards with previous
years, it was government policy that there should be no attempt to standardise
grades in 2021. This remains the case. If TAGs are needed in 2022 we intend that
the quality assurance arrangements would be similar to those used in 2021,
incorporating lessons we and the exam boards have learned.
The exam boards are considering the lessons to be learned from the 2021 process
and how they should quality assure TAGs in 2022 should that be necessary. The
precise way in which quality assurance of TAGs would operate, if necessary, in 2022
would be set out in detail once a decision to cancel exams was taken. The
arrangements would reflect the precise reason for and timing of any decision. We
are, however, seeking views on how this year’s arrangements could be improved
and strengthened. The feedback to this consultation will inform the final approach to
quality assuring TAGs in 2022, should they be needed next year.
Question 11
To what extent do you agree or disagree that schools and colleges
should only be required to develop centre policies for determining TAGs
if exams are cancelled in summer 2022?
Question 12
Do you have any comments on how schools and colleges should quality
assure TAGs in 2022 (should they be needed)?
Question 13
Do you have any comments on how the exam boards should quality
assure TAGs in 2022 (should they be needed)?
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
18
Question 14
Do you have any other comments about how TAGs should be quality
assured in 2022 (should they be needed)?
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
19
Appeals
In 2021, any student who received a grade based on a TAG had the right to appeal if
they believed something had gone wrong when their grade was determined. Appeals
could be made on the grounds of an administrative or procedural error by the
student’s school or college or by the exam board or on the grounds of the
unreasonable exercise of academic judgement, either in the choice of evidence used
to determine the TAG or in the determination of the TAG itself.
We envisage that if TAGs have to be used in 2022, the same provisions for appeals
should be made, but we recognise the appeals process for 2021 is still underway
and that we and the exam boards will want to ensure lessons are learned from that
process. Our starting proposal upon which we are consulting and which is subject to
that further feedback, is that this year’s arrangements could be carried forward
without further changes. The feedback to this consultation will inform the final
approach to the appeals process should TAGs be needed in 2022.
If we were to follow the same approach as in 2021, a student would appeal to their
school or college in the first instance, which would consider whether it made a
procedural or administrative error. If the student remained concerned after this stage
1 appeal, their school or college would submit an appeal to the exam board on the
student’s behalf.
As with the arrangements for 2021, if an error was found it would be corrected. The
outcome of the teacher assessment could be adjusted up or down as necessary to
correct the error. This means that an appeal will result in students being awarded the
result that best reflects their performance in assessments. The provision for grades
to be adjusted up or down as a result of an appeal, means that there is a disincentive
for students to appeal unless they have a genuine concern about their result.
However, in line with normal practice, the outcome of the teacher assessment should
only be changed if the person conducting the appeal found that the outcome was not
legitimate – that the outcome could not have been arrived at by a person who was
reasonably exercising their academic judgement.
We propose that, should TAGs be implemented for 2022, provision should again be
made for appeals where a student’s higher education place depends on the outcome
of the appeal to be prioritised by the exam boards. We propose that the final stage of
the appeal process should again be to Ofqual for consideration under its
Examination Procedure Review Service (EPRS). The EPRS would consider whether
the exam board had made any procedural errors in determining the grade or
considering the appeal, but the EPRS could not change a grade. If the EPRS found
an error had been made it would ask the exam board to review the case.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
20
Question 15
To what extent do you agree or disagree that students should be able to
appeal if TAGs are used in 2022?
Question 16
To what extent do you agree or disagree that the grounds for appeal
should cover:
a) administrative and procedural errors
b) errors of academic judgement
in determining the evidence used to determine a TAG?
Question 17
To what extent do you agree or disagree that the grounds for appeal
should cover:
a) administrative and procedural errors
b) errors of academic judgement
in the determination of the TAG itself?
Question 18
To what extent do you agree or disagree that appeals should first be
considered by the student’s school or college which would check for any
administrative or procedural errors?
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
21
Question 19
To what extent do you agree or disagree that if a student remained
concerned after an appeal to their school or college, the school or
college would submit an appeal to the exam board on the student’s
behalf?
Question 20
To what extent do you agree or disagree that a student’s result could
go down as well as up following an appeal?
Question 21
To what extent do you agree or disagree that a student who had
completed the appeal process could apply to Ofqual’s Examination
Procedural Review Service which would check that the exam board had
followed the correct procedure when issuing the grade and considering
an appeal?
Question 22
Do you have any other comments about appeal arrangements if TAGs
are used in 2022?
Equalities impact assessment
Before making these proposals, we have considered the likely impact on persons
who share particular protected characteristics. We have considered this impact in the
context of our public sector equality duty in section 149(1) of the Equality Act 2010.
This requires us to have due regard to the need to:
(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that
is prohibited by or under the Equality Act 2010
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
22
(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant
protected characteristic and persons who do not share it
(c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected
characteristic and persons who do not share it
Annex B sets out how this duty interacts with Ofqual’s statutory objectives and other
duties. Awarding organisations are required to comply with equalities legislation, and
Ofqual’s existing General Conditions of Recognition reinforce this in relation to the
qualifications awarding organisations make available. Awarding organisations are
required to monitor their qualifications to identify features which may disadvantage a
group of learners who may share a protected characteristic; this applies to the
design, delivery and award of their qualifications.
In summer 2021, exams did not take place due to the disruption to students’
education caused by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Instead, students were
awarded qualifications based on TAGs. Since the pandemic caused different levels
of disruption across the country, many schools and colleges had not been able to
teach all the course content. In response, for summer 2021, students were only
assessed on the content they had been taught while ensuring sufficient coverage of
the curriculum to enable progression. Ofqual’s analysis of summer 2021 results
showed general stability in the differences in outcomes for students with different
protected characteristics compared to previous years, and increases in outcomes for
many groups. This suggested that the changes in assessment arrangements for
summer 2021 lessened the unevenness in outcomes we may otherwise have seen.
This suggests that our proposed approach, without replicating exactly the
arrangements from 2021, may operate in a similar way in the event that exams are
cancelled.
Nonetheless, cancelling summer 2022’s exams and replacing them with teacher
assessment that would draw on a range of evidence of a student’s performance may
have relative advantages and disadvantages for different groups of students who
share particular protected characteristics. We welcome evidence on the possibility
that the proposed arrangements may lead to indirect discrimination, and the extent to
which they have the potential to advance equality of opportunity and foster good
relations.
In developing these proposed contingency arrangements for summer 2022, we have
sought to not unfairly disadvantage students, including on the basis of sharing a
protected characteristic. We have considered whether any of the proposals in this
consultation might impact (positively or negatively) on students who share particular
protected characteristics. We set these considerations out below, in addition to the
impacts we have identified in the relevant sections throughout this consultation. We
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
23
welcome further evidence on those areas we have identified but also on any that we
have not.
While it is not possible completely to remove all identified negative impacts, we are
keen to understand whether respondents agree with the impacts we have identified,
whether there are other impacts that we have not identified, and whether there are
ways to mitigate these impacts. We would therefore encourage you to read and
respond to this section.
Disabled students, including disabled private candidates, would have to be given
reasonable adjustments when taking any assessments that provide evidence of the
standard at which they are performing. We do not consider this would be
problematic, at least not if the assessments were undertaken within the school or
college. The student’s school or college would know how the student normally works
and make any such adjustments as were necessary to reflect the student’s normal
way of working.
If the assessments had to be taken in another venue, including at the student’s
home, some types of reasonable adjustment could be readily made, for example the
provision of extra time, or putting the assessment into a larger font. Other types of
adjustment could be more difficult to make, for example if the student would normally
dictate their work to a scribe or required specialist equipment or software to complete
remote assessments. We welcome respondents’ views on the best way to ensure
students receive the reasonable adjustments they need.
Although Ofqual’s analysis of summer 2021 results (awarded on the basis of TAGs )
showed general stability in the differences in outcomes for students with different
protected characteristics compared to previous years, we cannot ignore the risk of
unconscious bias towards those with one or more particular protected characteristics
when assessments are not exam-based. We would welcome any further evidence of
when and how such bias occurs and any best practice to reduce the risk. We do,
however, believe that being better able to advise schools and colleges on the scope
and nature of evidence for TAGs for summer 2022 (if they are needed) means that
there would be more opportunities for greater scrutiny of student work and its
marking through the quality assurance arrangements and therefore better
opportunities to spot cases where the evidence does not support the TAG submitted.
The proposed contingency arrangements for summer 2022 should be accessible to
students who are being educated in alternative forms of provision, such as hospital
schools, notwithstanding the issues identified above.
We are aware that a proportion of students who study outside a school or college
(private candidates) do so for reasons of SEND or illness. We would therefore
welcome evidence on any disproportionate or negative impact our proposals might
have on private candidates with particular protected characteristics.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
24
Similarly, teacher assessments could be more difficult to make and/or limited in their
usefulness where a student has poor attendance and/or a shorter history at the
school or college, and so less interaction with the teacher and presence in school
during times in which evidence is produced. For example, evidence from data on
school absences suggests that this is particularly a concern for Gypsy, Roma and
Traveller groups, who are likely to move schools more often, and in general struggle
to maintain sustainable links with schools. We welcome evidence on how best to
mitigate any disadvantage of our proposed contingency arrangements for these
groups of students.
It is important that assessments are as accessible and inclusive as possible, so that
students are not prevented from demonstrating what they know and can do. We
would welcome respondents’ views on how schools and colleges could be supported
to make any school or college-set assessments as accessible and inclusive as
possible.
We will need to take care to make sure all students, regardless of their protected
characteristics or wider circumstances, have access to information about the
contingency arrangements, including how to appeal their grade. This information
must be available to students directly, including those who do not have an
established relationship with a school or college, such as private candidates and
some Gypsy, Roma and Traveller students. In the unlikely event that exams are
cancelled, we will work with our extensive stakeholder networks to ensure that key
information is communicated to – and accessible for – all student groups. We will
publish information for students, in different formats, and provide an enquiries
service to support this.
While mental well-being is not a protected characteristic, we know that the impact of
the pandemic on students’ mental health and well-being is a common concern. We
trust that our proposed contingency arrangements will be of some benefit to
students’ mental health and well-being, as the proposals offer some certainty
regarding how students will be assessed in the unlikely event that exams are
cancelled, and will to an extent be familiar given the use of TAGs in 2021. We also
believe that being able to better advise schools and colleges on the scope and
nature of the evidence on which TAGs should be based (if exams were cancelled)
should help to reduce students’ anxiety that every piece of work they do might inform
their grade and the risk of over-assessment. We do, however, acknowledge that the
necessary flexibility of our proposals means that students will not be entirely certain
of the full detail of how they would be assessed until such a time as exams were
cancelled.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
25
Question 23
Do you believe the proposed arrangements (any or all) would have a
positive impact on particular groups of students because of their
protected characteristics?
Question 24
If you have answered ‘yes’ please explain your reason for each
proposed arrangement you have in mind.
Question 25
Do you believe the proposed arrangements (any or all) would have a
negative impact on particular groups of students because of their
protected characteristics?
Question 26
If you have answered ‘yes’ please explain your reason and suggest how
the negative impact could be removed or reduced for each proposed
arrangement you have in mind.
Regulatory impact assessment
As set out above, the government is firmly committed to GCSE, AS and A level
exams going ahead in England in academic year 2021 to 2022, with adaptations to
take account of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the education of the
students due to sit those exams.
If, as expected, these changes are sufficient to enable exams to go ahead as
planned, then the contingency arrangements will not need to be adopted.
We think a detailed assessment of the costs and savings associated with
hypothetical contingency arrangements is inappropriate at this time. That said, we
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
26
recognise it is important to understand the likely impacts of possible contingency
arrangements.
There are also some elements of our proposals that will have at least some
regulatory impact even if the proposed contingency arrangements are not needed.
Likely impact of implementing proposed
contingency arrangements
In this section we consider the activities that we expect may give rise to additional
costs and burdens, as well as any activities that may not take place and could
therefore deliver savings, should we need to implement our proposed contingency
arrangements. In many cases, these are similar to the costs, burdens and savings
that we anticipated for TAGs in 2021.
While, at this time, we do not anticipate that these additional costs, burdens and
savings will materialise, they nonetheless provide important context for our proposed
contingency arrangements.
Impact on schools and colleges
We expect there would be one-off, direct costs and administrative burdens to
schools and colleges associated with the following activities:
• familiarisation with information and guidance from exam boards on teacher
assessment and submitted grades
• communication and training from senior leaders to teaching staff on
teacher assessment and submitted grades
• marking and quality assurance of teacher assessments and submitted
grades
• amendments to centre systems to enable the required information to be
gathered and submitted to exam boards in a format specified by them
• managing high volumes of enquiries from candidates and parents
• managing potentially high volumes of appeals
Some of these costs and burdens are experienced in a normal year as part of
formative assessment and the provision of good quality teaching and learning.
Others – particularly those related to familiarisation with exam board information and
guidance, amendments to centre systems, and (to a lesser extent) training of
teaching staff – may be reduced compared to 2021. This is because we have
intentionally proposed contingency arrangements for 2022 that are as similar as
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
27
possible to those used for TAGs in 2021. This should help minimise the need for
schools and colleges to develop or familiarise themselves with additional new
systems, processes and guidance.
In addition, providing more detail about the scope and nature of the evidence
students will need to generate under the proposed contingency arrangements will
increase certainty for schools and colleges, and should help reduce burden further.
Schools and colleges would be delivering the final stages of contingency
arrangements in place of, and not in addition to, activity required to deliver summer
exams in their centre including, for example, secure handling of exam papers and
scripts, invigilation of exams and dealing with any cases of possible malpractice and
maladministration arising out of exam delivery. However, there will be additional
burden to schools and colleges in preparing both for exams and potential
contingency arrangements in advance of any decision to cancel exams.
We acknowledge that the burden of delivering the revised arrangements could be
greater and more challenging for both exam boards and centres if staff availability is
affected by COVID-19 and/or centres are closed for normal teaching. We also
acknowledge the exceptional impact of the pandemic on the workload of teachers
and their colleagues.
Impact on students
Students taking the relevant qualifications would be directly affected if we need to
implement the proposed contingency arrangements.
The proposed contingency arrangements are designed to ensure students are not
disadvantaged if it proves necessary to cancel exams, and that disruption to their
planned progression is minimised. As was the case in 2021, we would expect the
proposed contingency arrangements to ensure that all students, including private
candidates, can continue with their studies and will receive grades as expected in
August 2022.
If the proposed contingency arrangements are needed, then some private
candidates may incur costs in addition to expected exam entry costs if, for example,
centres who are able to assess them are limited and students need to pay for travel
or accommodation.
Impact on exam boards
The proposed contingency arrangements would apply to GCSE, AS and A level
qualifications regulated by Ofqual and provided by AQA, OCR, Pearson and WJEC
Eduqas.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
28
Should we need to implement the contingency arrangements, we would expect the
scale of impact to vary across each organisation according to the range of subjects
offered and number of entries. We would expect there to be one-off, direct costs and
administrative burdens to these organisations associated with the following activities:
• familiarisation with guidance published by Ofqual on the approach to
submitting grades
• familiarisation with any new or revised general, qualification level or
subject level conditions
• providing information and training to centres to inform teacher
assessments, quality assurance and submission of grades to exam boards
• providing guidance on reasonable adjustments and special consideration
in the context of teacher assessments
• if required, providing training and mark schemes to support teacher
marking
• developing and delivering processes and systems for the collation of
grades submitted by centres
• preventing, detecting and investigating any malpractice or
maladministration relating to the provision of submitted grades
• external quality assurance of submitted grades
• managing increased volumes of enquiries from centres and candidates
• delivery of appeal arrangements
• assessment of changed costs – both decreasing and increasing – and
determining appropriate fees
As with the costs and burdens for schools and colleges, some of these costs and
burdens – particularly those related to developing and familiarisation with new
arrangements – are likely to be reduced compared to 2021. Again, this is because
we have intentionally proposed contingency arrangements for 2022 that are as
similar as possible to those used for TAGs in 2021. This should help minimise the
need for exam boards to develop or familiarise themselves with additional new
systems, processes and guidance in the event that the proposed contingency
arrangements are needed.
We acknowledge that the exam boards are already incurring and will incur some
additional cost and burden through planning for and engaging with DfE and Ofqual
on any potential contingency arrangements – irrespective of whether these need to
be implemented. This is addition to the costs they will incur through the
implementation of the adaptations to the exams for next summer, such as the
provision of advance information.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
29
Any activities needed to deliver contingency arrangements would not be in addition
to usual arrangements for delivery of exams in the summer, rather, they are in place
of those arrangements. Activities that exam boards would not need to undertake, or
would undertake in a different way, should the proposed contingency arrangements
be needed, may include:
• printing, delivery, collection and scanning of exam papers and scripts
• marking of scripts - including examiner recruitment, standardisation, and
quality assurance arrangements
• identification and investigation of malpractice and maladministration
arising in usual exam delivery arrangements
• moderation of non-exam assessments
However, costs associated with some of these activities may already be
contractually committed and so may not be recoverable in full or in part. And if any
decision to cancel exams is taken relatively late in the academic year, preparations
for delivering exams (and the costs incurred in doing so) would be well underway.
Impact on the further education and higher
education sectors and employers
There would be significant negative impacts on the further education (FE) and higher
education (HE) sectors and employers if students were not able to progress as
planned in 2022.
That is why we are proposing contingency arrangements which would ensure – even
if exams are unable to proceed as planned – students can receive grades in time to
be able to progress to FE or HE.
As in 2021, it is also possible that the proposed contingency arrangements, should it
be necessary to implement these in place of exams, could allow for earlier results
dates so that appeals can begin to be dealt with before FE and HE decisions are
made.
Estimated costs and savings
As set out above, we think a detailed assessment of the costs and savings that might
arise should we need to implement contingency arrangements is not appropriate at
this time but factors that may influence these have been set out above.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
30
Likely impact if contingency arrangements not
needed
Even if the proposed contingency arrangements are (as we hope and expect) not
needed, we expect there would be one-off, direct costs and administrative burdens
associated with the following activities:
• schools and colleges developing and maintaining systems and processes
for collating and storing evidence that would be needed to determine
TAGs
• exam boards maintaining systems for collecting TAGs from schools and
colleges, quality assurance of TAGs and awarding based on TAGs
Innovation and growth
The Deregulation Act 2015 imposes a duty on any person exercising a regulatory
function to have regard for the desirability of promoting economic growth (the Growth
Duty). Ofqual must exercise its regulatory activity in a way that ensures that any
action taken is proportionate and only taken when needed. The Growth Duty sits
alongside Ofqual’s duty to avoid imposing unnecessary burden, as required under
the ASCL Act 2009, as well as its statutory duties relating to equality and the
Business Impact Target.
At this stage, we consider that the proposed contingency arrangements set out in
this consultation are – if needed – likely to be proportionate and necessary to
achieve our aims. We will of course revisit that question should it prove necessary to
adopt the proposed contingency arrangements.
Question 27
Are there additional burdens associated with the delivery of the
proposed arrangements on which we are consulting that we have not
identified above? If yes, what are they?
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
31
Question 28
What additional costs do you expect you would incur through
implementing the proposed arrangements on which we are consulting?
Please distinguish in your response between those costs you expect to
incur from preparing to put contingency arrangements in place, and
those that would be incurred if the arrangements were required.
Question 29
What costs would you save?
Please distinguish in your response between those costs you expect to
incur from preparing to put contingency arrangements in place, and
those that would be incurred if the arrangements were required.
Question 30
We would welcome your views on how we could reduce burden and
costs while achieving the same aims.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
32
Annex A: consultation responses and your
data
Why we collect your personal data
As part of our consultation process, you are not required to provide your name or
any personal information that will identify you. However, we are aware that some
respondents would like to provide contact information. If you or your organisation are
happy to provide personal data, with regard to this consultation, please complete the
details below. We would like to hear as many views as possible and ensure that we
are reaching as many people as possible. In order for us to monitor this, understand
views of different groups and take steps to reach specific groups, we may ask for
sensitive data such as ethnicity and disability to understand the reach of this
consultation and views of specific groups. You do not have to provide this
information and it is entirely optional
If there is any part of your response that you wish to remain confidential,
please indicate at the appropriate point in the survey.
Where you have requested that your response or any part remains confidential, we
will not include your details in any published list of respondents, however, we may
quote from the response anonymously in order to illustrate the kind of feedback we
have received.
Your data
Your personal data:
• will not be sent outside of the UK unless there are appropriate safeguards
in place to protect your personal data
• will not be used for any automated decision making
• will be kept secure
We implement appropriate technical and organisational measures in order to protect
your personal data against accidental or unlawful destruction, accidental loss or
alteration, unauthorised disclosure or access and any other unlawful forms of
processing.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
33
Your rights: access, rectification and erasure
As a data subject, you have the legal right to:
• access personal data relating to you
• object to the processing of your personal data
• have all or some of your data deleted or corrected
• prevent your personal data being processed in some circumstances
• ask us to stop using your data, but keep it on record
If you would like to exercise your rights, please contact us using the details below.
You can also find out more about Ofqual’s privacy information.
Freedom of Information Act and your response
Please note that information in response to this consultation may be subject to
release to the public or other parties in accordance with access to information law,
primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). We have obligations to
disclose information to particular recipients including members of the public in certain
circumstances. Your explanation of your reasons for requesting confidentiality for all
or part of your response would help us balance requests for disclosure against any
obligation of confidentiality. If we receive a request for the information that you have
provided in your response to this consultation, we will take full account of your
reasons for requesting confidentiality of your response and assess this in
accordance with applicable data protection rules.
Members of the public are entitled to ask for information we hold under the Freedom
of Information Act 2000. On such occasions, we will usually anonymise responses,
or ask for consent from those who have responded, but please be aware that we
cannot guarantee confidentiality.
If you choose ‘no’ in response to the question asking if you would like anything in
your response to be kept confidential, we will be able to release the content of your
response to the public, but we won’t make your personal name and private contact
details publicly available.
How we will use your response
We will use your response to help us shape our policies and regulatory activity. If
you provide your personal details, we may contact you in relation to your response.
We will analyse all responses and produce reports of consultation responses. In the
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
34
course of analysis, we will where possible avoid using your name and contact
details. We will only process the body of your response, but we are aware that in
some cases, this may contain information that could identify you.
Sharing your response
We may share your response, in full, with The Department for Education (DfE) and
The Institute for Apprenticeships & Technical Education (IFATE) where the
consultation is part of work involving those organisations. We may need to share
responses with them to ensure that our approach aligns with the wider process.
Where possible, if we share a response, we will not include any personal data (if you
have provided any). Where we have received a response to the consultation from an
organisation, we will provide the DfE and IFATE with the name of the organisation
that has provided the response, although we will consider requests for confidentiality.
Where we share data, we ensure that adequate safeguards are in place to ensure
that your rights and freedoms are not affected.
We use Citizen Space, which is part of Delib Limited, to collect consultation
responses and they act as our data processor. You can view Citizen Space’s privacy
notice.
Your response will also be shared internally within Ofqual in order to analyse the
responses and shape our policies and regulatory activity. We use third party
software to produce analysis reports, which may require hosting of data outside the
UK, specifically the US. Please note that limited personal information is shared. All
personal contact information is removed during this process. Where we transfer any
personal data outside the UK, we make sure that appropriate safeguards are in
place to ensure that the personal data is protected and kept secure.
Following the end of the consultation, we will publish an analysis of responses on our
website. We will not include personal details in the responses that we publish.
We may also publish an annex to the analysis listing all organisations that responded
but will not include personal names or other contact details.
How long will we keep your personal data?
Unless otherwise stated, Ofqual will keep your personal data (if provided) for a
period of 2 years after the consultation closing date.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
35
Our legal basis for processing your personal data
Where you provide personal data for this consultation, we are relying upon the public
task basis as set out in Article 6(1)(e) of UK GDPR to process personal data which
allows processing of personal data when this is necessary for the performance of our
public tasks. We will consult where there is a statutory duty to consult or where there
is a legitimate expectation that a process of consultation will take place. Where you
provide special category data, we process sensitive personal data such as ethnicity
and disability, we rely on Article 9(2)(g) of UK GDPR as processing is necessary for
reasons of substantial public interest.
The identity of the data controller and contact
details of our Data Protection Officer
This privacy notice is provided by The Office of Qualifications and Examinations
Regulation (Ofqual). The relevant data protection regime that applies to our
processing is the UK GDPR1 and Data Protection Act 2018 ('Data Protection Laws').
We ask that you read this privacy notice carefully as it contains important information
about our processing of consultation responses and your rights.
How to contact us
If you have any questions about this privacy notice, how we handle your personal
data, or want to exercise any of your rights, please contact our data protection officer
We will respond to any rights that you exercise within a month of receiving your
request, unless the request is particularly complex, in which case we will respond
within 3 months.
Please note that exceptions apply to some of these rights which we will apply in
accordance with the law.
1 Please note that as of 1st January 2021, data protection laws in the UK have changed. The General
Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679(GDPR) no longer applies to the UK. However, the UK has
incorporated GDPR into domestic law subject to minor technical changes. The Data Protection,
Privacy and Electronic Communications (Amendment etc.) EU exit Regulations (DPPEC) came into
force in the UK on 1st January 2021. This consolidates and amends the GDPR and UK Data
Protection Act 2018 to create the new UK GDPR.
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
36
You also have the right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner
(ICO) if you think we are not handling your data fairly or in accordance with the law.
You can contact the ICO at:
ICO
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Telephone: 0303 123 1113
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
37
Annex B – Ofqual’s role, objectives and
duties
The Apprenticeship, Skills, Children and Learning
Act 2009
Ofqual has five statutory objectives, set out in the Apprenticeship, Skills, Children
and Learning Act 2009;
1) The qualification standards objective, which is to secure that the
qualifications we regulate:
a) give a reliable indication of knowledge, skills and understanding; and b)
indicate:
i) a consistent level of attainment (including over time) between
comparable regulated qualifications; and
ii) a consistent level of attainment (but not over time) between
qualifications we regulate and comparable qualifications (including
those awarded outside of the UK) that we do not regulate
2) The assessment standards objective, which is to promote the development
and implementation of regulated assessment arrangements which:
a) give a reliable indication of achievement, and
b) indicate a consistent level of attainment (including over time) between
comparable assessments
3) The public confidence objective, which is to promote public confidence in
regulated qualifications and regulated assessment arrangements
4) The awareness objective, which is to promote awareness and
understanding of:
a) the range of regulated qualifications available,
b) the benefits of regulated qualifications to Students, employers and
institutions within the higher education sector, and
c) the benefits of recognition to bodies awarding or authenticating
qualifications
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
38
5) The efficiency objective, which is to secure that regulated qualifications are
provided efficiently, and that any relevant sums payable to a body awarding or
authenticating a qualification represent value for money.
We must therefore regulate so that qualifications properly differentiate between
Students who have demonstrated that they have the knowledge, skills and
understanding required to attain the qualification and those who have not.
We also have a duty under the Apprenticeship, Skills, Children and Learning Act
2009 to have regard to the reasonable requirements of relevant Students, including
those with special educational needs and disabilities, of employers and of the higher
education sector, and to aspects of government policy when so directed by the
Secretary of State.
The Equality Act 2010
As a public body, we are subject to the public sector equality duty. This duty requires
us to have due regard to the need to:
a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other
conduct that is prohibited under the Equality Act 2010
b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant
protected characteristic and persons who do not share it
c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected
characteristic and persons who do not share it
The awarding organisations that design, deliver and award qualifications are
required by the Equality Act, among other things, to make reasonable adjustments
for disabled people taking their qualifications, except where we have specified that
such adjustments should not be made.
When we decide whether such adjustments should not be made, we must have
regard to:
a) the need to minimise the extent to which disabled persons are
disadvantaged in attaining the qualification because of their disabilities
b) the need to secure that the qualification gives a reliable indication of
the knowledge, skills and understanding of a person upon whom it is
conferred
c) the need to maintain public confidence in the qualification
We are subject to a number of duties and we must aim to achieve a number of
objectives. These different duties and objectives can, sometimes conflict with each
other. For example, if we regulate to secure that a qualification gives a reliable
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
39
indication of a Student’s knowledge, skills and understanding, a Student who has not
been able to demonstrate the required knowledge, skills and/or understanding will
not be awarded the qualification.
A person may find it more difficult, or impossible, to demonstrate the required
knowledge, skills and/or understanding because they have a protected
characteristic. This could put them at a disadvantage relative to others who have
been awarded the qualification.
It is not always possible for us to regulate so that qualifications give a reliable
indication of knowledge, skills and understanding and advance equality between
people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. We must review
all the available evidence and actively consider all the available options before
coming to a final, justifiable decision.
Qualifications cannot mitigate inequalities or unfairness in the education system or in
society more widely that might affect, for example, Students’ preparedness to take
the qualification and the assessments within it. While a wide range of factors can
have an impact on a Student’s ability to achieve a particular assessment, our
influence is limited to the qualification design and assessment.
We require awarding bodies to design qualifications that give a reliable indication of
the knowledge, skills and understanding of the Students that take them. We also
require awarding organisations to avoid, where possible, features of a qualification
that could, without justification, make a qualification more difficult for a Student to
achieve because they have a particular protected characteristic. We require
awarding organisations to monitor whether any features of their qualifications have
this effect.
In setting our proposed requirements, we want to understand the possible impacts of
the proposals on Students who share a protected characteristic. The protected
characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 are:
• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnerships
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sex
• sexual orientation
Contingency arrangements: GCSE, AS, A level, Project and AEA
40
With respect to the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act,
we are not required to have due regard to impacts on those who are married or in a
civil partnership.
41
©️ Crown Copyright 2021
This publication is licensed under the terms of
the Open Government Licence v3.0 except
where otherwise stated.
View the Open Government Licence at The National Archives website or write to:
Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU
Published by:
Earlsdon Park
53-55 Butts Road
Coventry
CV1 3BH
0300 303 3344
www.gov.uk/ofqual
September 2021 Ofqual//21/6838/2